This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I tagged this for notability. It was removed with the statement that multiple RS's show the notability. Problem is, they aren't here. The first source, ABC News, never mentions Mills. It talks about the AB, but not him. Thus is doesn't establish his notability, nor does it support what the article says when it claims "including Mills". I removed it. The second source, the BBC, does mention Mills. In fact, it is just that, a mere mention. So claiming it is "significant coverage" is dubious. The third source, People v Price, never mentions Mills. I removed it. The Last source, a court case involving Mills, of course mentions him, but it is a primary source, so we still have a notability issue. If the significant coverage is out there, find it and cite it. But you can't just remove tags because you think it's out there.Niteshift36 (talk) 12:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First off, that article isn't used here. Second, nobody disputes that the AB is notable, but that doesn't make every leader notable. A high school is also notable. Being the principal doesn't make you notable. There needs to be significant third party coverage, which is not in this article currently. If you want to add significant third party coverage, then by all means Fix it, but don't just remove the tag because you decide he's notable. Also be careful in how things are stated. I found cases of things being professed as sourced, but were not in the source at all. Niteshift36 (talk) 12:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And it doesn't establish notability. It is coverage of the AB that mentions Mills 5 times. Improvement, yes. Notability? Not yet.Niteshift36 (talk) 13:03, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you don't understand. I know there is material out there. I don't dispute that. It needs to be IN HERE. If it isn't HERE, then it doesn't matter. Notability has to be established HERE, not on Google. Saying "google the guy" is just plain lazy. Do the work, improve the article, THEN see the tag disappear. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's precisely what I'm doing. Four new sources and new content added. As I'm finding it a bit early in the morning for condescension and textual shouting, I'll move on. I'm confident this meets our notability guidelines now, but I won't war with you over the tag. Good day, The Interior(Talk)14:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's what you're doing now. You were just removing the tag and doing nothing before. That's how this discussion got started. As for the "shouting", emphasis was clearly needed since you were yakking about sources that weren't here and told me to "Google the guy". I'm glad you finally stopped being lazy just removing the tag and actually worked on improving the article. Good day to you. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:22, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
